Herring Networks, Inc. V. Maddow, 445 F
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT HERRING NETWORKS, INC., No. 20-55579 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:19-cv-01713- BAS-AHG RACHEL MADDOW; COMCAST CORPORATION; NBCUNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC; MSNBC CABLE, LLC, OPINION Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Cynthia A. Bashant, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted July 27, 2021 Pasadena, California Filed August 17, 2021 Before: MILAN D. SMITH, JR. and JOHN B. OWENS, Circuit Judges, and EDUARDO C. ROBRENO,* District Judge. Opinion by Judge Milan D. Smith, Jr. * The Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. 2 HERRING NETWORKS V. MADDOW SUMMARY** Defamation / Anti-SLAAP Motion The panel affirmed the district court’s judgment granting Appellees’ motion to strike Herring Network, Inc.’s defamation complaint pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP statute, and dismissing Herring Networks, Inc.’s defamation suit with prejudice. Herring launched One American News Network (OAN) in 2013. Rachel Maddow, host of a show on MSNBC, ran a segment stating that OAN employee Kristen Rouz worked for OAN, but was “also being paid by the Russian government to produce government-funded pro-Putin propaganda for a Russian government funded propaganda outfit called Sputnik.” Herring sued Maddow and related entities for defamation. Maddow filed a motion to strike the complaint pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which the district court granted. The panel first addressed Herring’s argument that the district court should have considered five pieces of proffered evidence outside of the pleadings in determining whether to grant Maddow’s motion to strike.
[Show full text]